Pete Seeger came into prominance in an era that tolerated low key performers and intelectual performances. In today's atmosphere of glitz, scatology and volume, gentle and thoughtful acts are as likely to get attention as a mime and poetry act. Pete represents our link to a time when one didn't have to shout to be heard.
Politically, Pete is no more commited to peace than any number of well known celebrities. If Pete deserves Nobel consideration, what about Will Geer, Harry Belafonte, Joan Baez, Jane Fonda or, for that matter, that grand old rebel, Lee Hays? When it comes to political consistancy, give me Paul Robeson (who was one hell of a folksinger).
Let's admit that the Nobel Peace Prize should not be awarded for intent, alone. There has to be a direct and resultant peace from the actions of the honoree. We're talking Dr. King, Ralph Bunche and a few folks we don't like so much, but whose actions produced real peace, folks like Anwar Sadat, Menachim Begin and Henry Kissinger.
(As it has been said, one does not sign peace treaties with friends.)
So, Pete deserves props for his singing and his liberalism, but a Nobel, not so much.